Talk:Planetary oceanography
 | This page was proposed for deletion by Andyjsmith (talk · contribs) on 19 September 2021. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Requested move 12 November 2020
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Astrooceanography → Planetary oceanography – Astrooceanography is probably a protologism, not coined by academic sources. Thus, we have to purge this protologism in favour of "planetary oceanography" à la planetary geology. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 13:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 21:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - This article is currently a stub and the fact that it seems to be unclear what to call it may reflect the fact that the subject is not currently notable enough to warrant its own article. A merger with another article, such as the aforementioned planetary geology, may be more appropriate unless more references can be found which would likely also make it clearer what the most appropriate title for the article would be. A plain but somewhat awkward title such as "Oceanography on other worlds" may also be more appropriate, as 'planetary oceanography' by itself could suggest that it only meant oceanography on planets, and not moons; or could suggest the study of all of the oceans on Planet Earth. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 20:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment This should probably be an AFD blindlynx (talk) 19:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - I don't see anything to justify that just yet. It's a short page and there's an argument for merging it with another article, but it has references and all that. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- I would support a merge. blindlynx (talk) 16:17, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - I don't see anything to justify that just yet. It's a short page and there's an argument for merging it with another article, but it has references and all that. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I've just moved some text here from ocean. I hope you agree that it fits here? I was a bit unsure if it would fit better into Extraterrestrial liquid water. EMsmile (talk) 14:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- "Astrooceanography" is a neologism. I can't find any serious reference on Google outside of duplicates of this article and of a few non-RS blogs. Plus there's a lot of WP:OR here. So I'm moving it to Extraterrestrial liquid water. Andyjsmith (talk) 11:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Deletion
editI prodded this article as contrary to WP:NEO because no reliable sources. Then I found that an article with the same name was deleted in 2006. One way or the other it shouldn’t be here Andyjsmith (talk) 09:46, 19 September 2021 (UTC)